digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Biofuel Problem Solved! Use Billion Acres of Fallow Farmland

livescience.com — No need to cut down forests anymore, as roughly 1 - 1.2 billion acres of existing farmland sits fallow. Using this land to grow biofuels may help to alleviate energy crises.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jquipp, on 06/25/2008, -4/+6Why not ... should make all parties (industrialists and environmentalists) happy, which is the sign of a truly great solution!
    • greenfyre, on 06/25/2008, -0/+8and the reason that land is fallow is ...

      alternatively we could just immediately stop wasting energy and even look seriously at needs vs indulgences to conserve even further. That actually gets us to an immediate 40% to 60% reduction, which could buy us a little time to deal with the rest.
    • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -3/+2Greenpeace recently changed their minds and said nuclear power is actually a good option.

      Wonder how long it will take the biofuel people to realize they aren't really solving anything, only making it worse.

      Go google the Ogallala Aquifer, it is merely one part of a much larger problem..

      Fresh water is finite.

      We keep using it up like there is no tomorrow we will start thinking bottled water was cheap back in the 2000's, because we will eventually be using desalinization plants.
      • lajaw, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1"Ogallala Aquifer" Why are you so hung up on this? In some areas, the water level has actually risen. In other areas, it is down. But just like my well on my property that I irrigate with, the level fluctuates from month to month. The Ogallala may be fluctuating from decade to decade or century to century. You must remember that geology uses a lot of assumptions. For instance, in south Texas, oil wells capped from low production in the 70's are now producing as much or more as first drilled. Others are still dry. Geology deals with many unknowns.
      • skidooer, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1"Wonder how long it will take the biofuel people to realize they aren't really solving anything, only making it worse."

        I hear this a lot, but what I never hear is what else are we going to do with the surplus corn? Even with ethanol, we only used a portion of last year's harvest.

        Ideally, we wouldn't have to grow corn at all, but it's essential in crop rotation.
    • Spuy767, on 06/26/2008, -1/+1No Biofuel will answer our energy/environmental crisis. Almost all biofuel processing techniques currently available have a carbon footprint similar to petroleum based fuels when all is said and done. Think about it as a problem of efficiency. No system can be 100% efficient, so the number of steps in a system is inversely proportional to its efficiency. With biofuels, and I'm leaving out some tertiary, but pretty big parts of the equation here, we have growing and harvesting, refinement, and eventual burning in an internatl combustion engine which by its very nature converts about 70% of its energy to heat. So right of the top we're down to 30% efficiency best case. Throw in the carbon footprint of the tractors harvesting the crop, and don't give me that "we run the tractors off of biofuel" *****, cause that's a chicken/egg problem, and since no system can be 100% efficient, the system is not sustainable. I guess what I'm trying to get at, is that an electro motive or purely electric car is the only way that we're going to be able to make an impact, and it all comes down to efficiency, and the environmantal impact of how we get our energy. /end rant
      • br0ck, on 06/26/2008, -1/+2"all biofuel processing techniques currently available have a carbon footprint similar to petroleum based fuels"
        This is not true at all. Petroleum based fuels release CO2 from millions of years ago. Ethanol just releases the same CO2 that was recently absorbed by the plant during growth.

        "No system can be 100% efficient"
        Efficiency is not the issue. The plants are converting massive amounts of energy from the sun to build their internal structures. How do you think your food is giving you energy? Why would farmers even bother to grow you food if they could produce more food energy per acre than was required to grow it?

        "that's a chicken/egg problem, and since no system can be 100% efficient"
        The energy comes from the sun. Switchgrass cellulosic ethanol production produces 5-8 times as much ethanol as corn on the same amount of land and current methods produce 540% more ethanol than is required to till the fields and refine the ethanol. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=grass-makes-be ...
    • IglooBurner, on 06/26/2008, -0/+0okay than... lets get started.
  • imadiva, on 06/26/2008, -5/+3If the land is currently fallow, seems more people could also make a living from it ... which is typically the argument against environmentalism. Nice!
    • skidooer, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2Nobody can make a living farming, unless, perhaps, you are part of a mega-corporate farming operation.
  • richardk138, on 06/26/2008, -5/+2If they could actually put this plan into action it would be a huge step in the right direction
  • freedomdigg, on 06/26/2008, -5/+0it is good
  • D1Foley, on 06/26/2008, -2/+66The land is fallow for a reason, to regain nutrients so it can grow food again.
    Biofuels are unfeasible
    • TheImaginator, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3Yep - fields are left fallow to recuperate, but crop rotation is an option as well as sowing the land with cow or pig manure which is always in plentiful supply.
      Or you could use the waste as fuel...
    • PAStheLoD, on 06/26/2008, -4/+1that's why we should engineer/find/make plants that use very small amount of the resources from the soil, instead uses solar energy to convert CO2 into oil.
      • tas08, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2And that would just cost more money in research that could go into better/more efficient solar and fuel cells. And we still don't have enough farmland to make bio-fuels practical - even if we farmed for nothing else.
      • bono4u, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1That leads to new plants merging with existing plants making uncontrolled possibly bad results. At this time there is hardly any corn anymore which is not influenced by genetically developed corn.

        Have a look for Monsanto documentaries & genitally engineered seeds
    • tas08, on 06/26/2008, -0/+9That's what I was thinking... don't you always let a portion of your land remain fallow, rotating where you plant so you will always have healthy soil for your next crop? That is the theory right? So then suddenly using all the fallow land for anything sounds like a horrible and dangerous idea lest we use up all our good land at once...
      • skidooer, on 06/26/2008, -1/+1"don't you always let a portion of your land remain fallow"

        I have never heard of anyone letting their land remain fallow in this part of the world. Land is way too expensive ($8000/acre) for that to ever happen.
    • ryanpoleary, on 06/26/2008, -1/+4a) Yes, they are being abandoned to be revisited/reused.

      b) We will eventually need every acre of arable land for food as population/demand continue to increase.

      c) Biofuels are still inefficient, and usually generate the same, if not less, energy than was used to derive them.

      Biofuel problem not solved.
    • sodade, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3Growing switchgrass in a fallow field makes it fertile again. Look it up.
      • skidooer, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Switchgrass is a horrible crop to harvest, transport, and store. Corn is ridiculously simple by comparison. I believe there is no doubt that switchgrass packs more energy, but when you look at the entire supply chain, is it really more efficient than corn?
    • br0ck, on 06/26/2008, -1/+1Fallowing is NOT used to increase nutrient levels. It is used only to control pests and used by governments to prevent over-supply. Crop rotation is used to increase nutrients. Low maintenence, low water and low fertilizer bio-fuel crops could easily be used in a successful crop rotation.

      "fallow land, cropland that is not seeded for a season; it may or may not be plowed. The land may be cultivated or chemically treated for control of weeds and other pests or may be left unaltered. Allowing land to lie fallow serves to accumulate moisture in dry regions (see dry farming) or to check weeds and plant diseases. As a method of restoring productivity, rotation of crops is now preferred to fallowing, which is considered wasteful of humus and nitrogen." http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0818206.html
      • kelmaster1, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1If it is native vegetation used for the fallow, it stabilizes the soil and does draw up nutrients. Crop rotation does increase more nutrients but it also decreases soil stabilization.

        A fallow is better because it helps prevent soil erosion and land degradation. Then you can go about crop rotations.
        • br0ck, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2How do the native plants grow without drawing up nutrients? Do you have sources? Anyway, switchgrass is very similar in all properties to the type of weeds and native vegetation that grow on a fallow field.
    • kelmaster1, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Agreed, Using valuable cropland for making a "renewable" energy source is a bad idea and is not economically worth it.
    • dianebl, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1I live in a rural area near Ottawa, Ontario. There are many, many fields nearby that obviously have not been planted for years. A few of them are being harvested for hay, but most just sit there, empty. The farmers who own them can either no longer make a living from them, or are to old to plant them.

      But with the rise in canola and corn prices, it is probably worthwhile to a few of the farmers to start planting again.
    • Pulledteeth, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Corn as a Biofuel is unfeasible. Biofuels in and of themselves are very feasible. Brazil uses Sugar ethanol just fine, because it givges a better energy yield than does corn.
  • Kyan, on 06/26/2008, -1/+22I copy and paste the first comment from the story, because it is exactly what I was thinking:

    "An interesting article. One point that I feel is missing from the analysis is the fact that leaving fields fallow for a growing season is an important step in naturally replenishing nutrients in soils, especially nitrogen and phosphorous. While fertilizers and other nutrient supplements are used (and often overused) to artificially replenish these nutrients, I suspect that much of the fallow land identified by the aforementioned study in less industrialized areas where leaving fields fallow is the most financially and agriculturally sound crop rotation scheme.

    While I think it's good to pursue areas that may be eligible for growing biofuel crops, I suspect that many of them are simply undergoing crop rotation. A suggestion to the researchers may be to overlay satellite data from multiple growing seasons to more accurately determine which areas are in the process of crop rotation and which are truly vacant."
  • Sagags, on 06/26/2008, -11/+6Biofuel = Biological Fuel

    Biological = Life

    Humans are alive, therefore

    Biofuel = Humans
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+4Like soylent green for cars!
    • jaksu, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3Yabba Dabba Doo!
    • Murdats, on 06/26/2008, -0/+5GREEN FUEL IS PEOPLE!!!!
    • Steinr, on 06/26/2008, -1/+1I hope that you don't have to calculate my paycheck ever!!
    • tas08, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Who do you think you are, Stephen Colbert or something? He can connect anything in 5 or fewer steps I believe.
  • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -5/+8Biofuel Problem Solved! Legalize Hemp!
    http://www.hempcar.org/
  • lineman60, on 06/26/2008, -4/+3The Government would never go for that, It's logical. (or because all the organizations are complaining about rising food prices) how about feeding the indigent? Did not RTFM if they are fallow for crop rotation we would be causing a bigger problem latter on.
  • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -3/+4Great, let's use farmland to grow fuel while fresh water stocks continue to diminish. Who cares, we'll be dead by then anyways, we can leave those problems to our kids right?

    Why should we attempt a long term solution with our billions of dollars when we can slap a short term bandage on our problems.

    Who cares about the fact that biofuel isn't going to bring down the price of oil anyways, I mean we would like have to face up to reality and realize the problem isn't the supply of oil but economic conditions. Inflation, speculation, war, fear mongering.

    Who care's grow some fuel, make the sheep feel like they are solving something.
    • EffYoo, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1lol, for someone who cares so little it isn't surprising that you know so little about the issues surrounding this idea
      • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -1/+3Go google the Ogallala Aquifer.

        Then go open a newspaper and read about places like Las Vegas and Georgia.

        Then come back when YOU know something about issues that affect growing biofuels.

        I am all for using algae, especially at the coal plants.

        But it is a waste when we should be using the money for more then tossing a bandaid on our addiction to oil.
        • EffYoo, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3wtf makes you think they would try to grow biofuels in nevada or georgia? Agriculture requires three things - soil, climate and water. A deficit of these things in one region won't impact their availability 500 miles away.
        • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Man you are dense.

          The Ogallala supplies the water to South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma Kansas, New Mexico and Texas.

          It is running dry. Even with the now minimized use on it, it supplies 1/5 of all water used for agriculture.

          I guess google is too much to ask of people.

          I was merely pointing out Nevada and Georgia as they are the more glaring at present.

          How about California, drought, North Dakota, drought, Idaho, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon....

          You beginning to get a picture here?

          The Ogallala, 1/5 of the water we use at CURRENT levels, without adding biofuel, could run out in as little as 25 years. Though more likely 50 to 75 if you wish to be optimisitic.

          Either way, you come back when YOU know what you are talking about.
    • badjohnbad, on 06/26/2008, -1/+2'Make the sheep feel like they are solving something'..... MU-HA HA HA HAAAAAA
  • KingGorilla, on 06/26/2008, -1/+14Isn't it fallow for a reason?
  • thethinktank, on 06/26/2008, -9/+3queue the diggers commenting about "but they're turning food into fuel!" myth that is perpetuated by big oil. biofuel is our only hope to free ourselves from foreign oil, and the threat of OPEC nations on our livelihood. solar, wind, nuclear and wave electricity and electric cars do ZERO to help the fact that we have more than one hundred million internal combustion cars in America that need fuel. Better that fuel come from the midwest than the middle east... until we can get to an electric car or hydrogen fuel cell economy, biofuels are the bridge that gets us there.
    • FatBird19, on 06/26/2008, -2/+1Food is for eating. I'd rather be "oil dependent" with a fuel efficient car than oil-free, wasting someone's lunch.
    • fuzzypuppy, on 06/26/2008, -1/+5I'm curious as to how it's a myth. Corn is an edible crop. Corn is being made into fuel. Therefore we are turning food into fuel.

      If you meant to say it's a myth that turning food into fuel is harmful, then it is you who is buying into the propaganda of the environmentalists.

      Corn and corn products are used in almost every single prepared food product in North America. In Mexico, corn is also a staple for the millions of peasants who can't afford prepared food. If you now have a huge portion of your corn going to fuel production, it becomes more scarce and the price rises beyond the means of the poor folk. Another side effect of its scarcity is that, even if they managed to scrape some extra money together, they might not even be able to find any for sale.

      I'm not seeing how this is a good thing.

      Especially because creating ethanol fuel is extremely inefficient so a huge portion of that corn is essentially being wasted by the process of turning it into fuel.
  • unknownohm, on 06/26/2008, -3/+2but then how will the oil tycoons stay filthy rich?
  • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -1/+5Farming 6% of the continental U.S. acreage with biomass crops would provide all of America's energy needs.

    Hemp is Earth's number-one biomass resource; it is capable of producing 10 tons per acre in four months.

    Biomass can be converted to methane, methanol, or gasoline at a cost comparable to petroleum, and hemp is much better for the environment. Pyrolysis (charcoalizing), or biochemical composting are two methods of turning hemp into fuel.

    Hemp can produce 10 times more methanol than corn.

    Hemp fuel burns clean. Petroleum causes acid rain due to sulfur pollution.

    The use of hemp fuel does not contribute to global warming.

    http://www.hempcar.org/hempfacts.shtml
    • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Where you plan on getting all the extra fresh water?
      • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2Hemp is a very resilient crop that doesn't require as much water as most other plants. If we planted it in places that receive rainfall or have rivers nearby, we don't need to worry about that. The great thing about hemp is you can grow it almost anywhere.
    • helpfulcorn, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Sugar cane produces even more than hemp, no need to legalize anything! But that's not really your goal, is it?
      • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2There is plenty of need to legalize the most important crop in human history, which was the number one cash crop in this country until tobacco and cotton took over. But you probably just think I want to get high.

        "The added cost of the extra drying needed for crops such as sugar cane, corn and Napier grasses make these high moisture plants an inefficient source for growing methanol. The (Hawaii Natural Energy) Institutes' 1990 report concluded that thermo chemical (pyrolytic) production of methanol from biomass is the most economical alternative for transportation fuel. They also confirmed Stanford Research Institutes' conclusion from the late seventies that woody or low moisture herbaceous plants are the most efficient biomass resource for thermo chemical conversion into liquid fuels such as methanol. It is the cellulose in low moisture herbaceous and woody plants that provides the hydrocarbons necessary for fuel production. ... Hemp is both a low moisture herbaceous and a woody plant.”

        http://hemp-ethanol.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archiv ...

        Food:
        Hemp seed can be pressed into a nutritious oil, which contains the highest amount of fatty acids in the plant kingdom. Essential oils are responsible for our immune system responses, and clear the arteries of cholesterol and plaque.
        The byproduct of pressing the oil from hemp seed is high quality protein seed cake. It can be sprouted (malted) or ground and baked into cakes, breads, and casseroles. Hemp seed protein is one of mankind's finest, most complete and available-to-the-body vegetable proteins.
        Hemp seed was the world's number one wild and domestic bird seed until the 1937 Marijuana prohibition law. Four million pounds of hemp seed for songbirds were sold at retail in the U.S. in 1937. Birds will pick hemp seeds out and eat them first from a pile of mixed seed. Birds in the wild live longer and breed more with hemp seed in their diet, using the oil for the feathers and their overall health.

        Fiber:
        Hemp is the oldest cultivated fiber plant in the world.
        Low-THC fiber hemp varieties developed by the French and others have been available for over 20 years. It is impossible to get high from fiber hemp. Over 600,000 acres of hemp is grown worldwide with no drug misuse problem.
        One acre of hemp can produce as much usable fiber as 4 acres of trees or two acres of cotton.
        Trees cut down to make paper take 50 to 500 years to grow, while hemp can be cultivated in as little as 100 days and can yield 4 times more paper over a 20 year period.
        Until 1883, from 75-90% of all paper in the world was made with cannabis hemp fiber including that for books, Bibles, maps, paper money, stocks and bonds, newspapers, etc.
        Hemp paper is longer lasting than wood pulp, stronger, acid-free, and chlorine free. (Chlorine is estimated to cause up to 10% of all Cancers.)
        Hemp paper can be recycled 7 times, wood pulp 4 times.
        If the hemp pulp paper process reported by the USDA in 1916, were legal today it would soon replace 70% of all wood paper products.
        Rag paper containing hemp fiber is the highest quality and longest lasting paper ever made. It can be torn when wet, but returns to its full strength when dry. Barring extreme conditions, rag paper remains stable for centuries.
        Hemp particle board may be up to 2 times stronger than wood particleboard and holds nails better.
        Hemp is softer, warmer, more water absorbent, has three times the tensile strength, and is many times more durable than cotton. Hemp production uses less chemicals than cotton.
        From 70-90% of all rope, twine, and cordage was made from hemp until 1937.
        A strong lustrous fiber; hemp withstands heat, mildew, insects, and is not damaged by light. Oil paintings on hemp and/or flax canvas have stayed in fine condition for centuries.

        Medicine:
        Deaths from marijuana use: 0
        From 1842 through the 1880s, extremely strong marijuana (then known as cannabis extractums), hashish extracts, tinctures, and elixirs were routinely the second and third most-used medicines in America for humans (from birth through old age). These extracts were also used in veterinary medicine until the 1920s and longer.
        For at least 3,000 years prior to 1842 widely varying marijuana extracts (bud, leaves, roots, etc.) were the most commonly used real medicines in the world for the majority of mankind's illnesses.
        The U.S. Pharmacopoeia indicated cannabis should be used for treating such ailments as fatigue, fits of coughing, rheumatism, asthma, delirium tremens, migraine headaches, and the cramps and depressions associated with menstruation.
        In this century, cannabis research has demonstrated therapeutic value and complete safety in the treatment of many health problems including asthma, glaucoma, nausea, tumors, epilepsy, infection, stress, migraines, anorexia, depression, rheumatism, arthritis, and possibly herpes.
        Deaths from aspirin (U.S. per year): 180 - 1,000 +
        Deaths from legal drugs (U.S. per year) at doses used for prevention, diagnosis, or therapy: 106,000

        Industry:
        Almost any product that can be made from wood, cotton, or petroleum (including plastics) can be made from hemp. There are more than 25,000 known uses for hemp.
        For thousands of years virtually all good paints and varnishes were made with hemp seed oil and/or linseed oil.
        Hemp stems are 80% hurds (pulp by-product after the hemp fiber is removed from the plant). Hemp hurds are 77% cellulose - a primary chemical feed stock (industrial raw material) used in the production of chemicals, plastics, and fibers. Depending on which U.S. agricultural report is correct, an acre of full grown hemp plants can sustainably provide from four to 50 or even 100 times the cellulose found in cornstalks, kenaf, or ***sugar cane (the planet's next highest annual cellulose plants).
        One acre of hemp produces as much cellulose fiber pulp as 4.1 acres of trees, making hemp a perfect material to replace trees for pressed board, particle board, and concrete construction molds.
        Heating and compressing plant fibers can create practical, inexpensive, fire-resistant construction materials with excellent thermal and sound-insulating qualities. These strong plant fiber construction materials could replace dry wall and wood paneling. William B. Conde of Conde's Redwood Lumber, Inc. near Eugene, Oregon, in conjunction with Washington State University (1991-1993), has demonstrated the superior strength, flexibility, and economy of hemp composite building materials compared to wood fiber, even as beams.
        Isochanvre, a rediscovered French building material made from hemp hurds mixed with lime petrifies into a mineral state and lasts for many centuries. Archeologists have found a bridge in the south of France from the Merovingian period (500-751 A.D.), built with this process.
        Hemp has been used throughout history for carpet backing. Hemp fiber has potential in the manufacture of strong, rot resistant carpeting - eliminating the poisonous fumes of burning synthetic materials in a house or commercial fire, along with allergic reactions associated with new synthetic carpeting.
        Plastic plumbing pipe (PVC pipes) can be manufactured using renewable hemp cellulose as the chemical feed stocks, replacing non-renewable coal or petroleum based chemical feed stocks.
        In 1941 Henry Ford built a plastic car made of fiber from hemp and wheat straw. Hemp plastic is biodegradable, synthetic plastic is not.

        http://www.hempcar.org/hempfacts.shtml
        • helpfulcorn, on 06/26/2008, -1/+0Exactly my point.
        • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1First you say there is no need to legalize it, now you are agreeing with me? Huh? Well, anyhow I hope you understand now how important it is that we legalize hemp.
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -1/+1Shameless plug:
      http://digg.com/environment/Hemp_Ethanol_Saves_the ...

      Please digg!
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Algae can be put in a sealed chamber and run off of smoke stacks. So it can actually use less water and is more efficient than Hemp.
      • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Is that really practical on a large scale? Hemp doesn't "use" water like you are thinking, unlike algae which requires standing water to grow. Hemp can be grown with rainfall or river water. I still believe we should use multiple options available for biofuel so we aren't dependent on just one crop. However hemp has so many other valuable uses that keeping it illegal is a crime against humanity.
    • freedomdigg, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1good
  • LilRabbitFooFoo, on 08/11/2008, -1/+7Solar power panels on the roofs of every building in America, folks.

    All the rest of these solutions are too expensive, inefficient, drop in the bucket options.
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Well I agree that we should have solar power on every roof, that doesn't solve our current problem with gas burning cars.
      • LilRabbitFooFoo, on 08/11/2008, -0/+3Yes, it does. Battery powered cars are the answer, charging off the electrical grid...from solar.

        Biofuels don't solve any problems either. You STILL need a new car, so why not electric? They are now better in every way. Again, biofuels are a huge boondoggle waste of time, money, and infrastructure. If you want to burn them somewhere into the electrical grid, fine, but solar is better.

        PS Solar could be even LESS efficient that it is now and by putting it on every roof in America, we would have a surplus of energy for the next millennium...every with TODAY'S solar panel tech.
        • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -1/+3I have to agree to a point.

          I would say invest in electric or hydrogen cars, with lots of nuclear plants that don't put co2 into the air.

          But that would actually be thinking about mid term solutions to our problems.

          We don't do that in America.

          We toss a short term bandaid on it and wait till the long term comes to pass then scramble around like we are now.
        • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2Yes, I agree we should switch to electric cars ASAP. Like I said, that doesn't help with the millions of gas burning cars on the road already. Most people have used cars and can't afford to buy a new car. Most diesel engines can run on biodiesel without any mods, gas engines take a few hundred dollars in parts to run on ethanol. We need an immediate solution to this energy crisis and biofuels are the best we have.
        • Naieve, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1There is no immediate solution to this problem.

          Biofuel will be a mid term bandaid, nothing more.

          In committing to that midterm bandaid, we will forgo a long term solution.
        • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1That's all biofuel is meant to be. We need to switch to electric ASAP but we also need to think about our current situation with our economy about to fail because of high gas prices. Would you rather we do nothing? Or maybe we should force everyone to buy an electric?
    • randomnotions, on 06/26/2008, -2/+1also solar panel technology in itself is not very efficient
  • tabaczka, on 06/26/2008, -3/+3Poop poop a doop
  • ilovemacs, on 06/26/2008, -4/+3hey guys, i think the land is fallow.

    it's just...too fallow.

    fallow.
    • cubbiesx, on 06/26/2008, -0/+2well i thought that was funny at least.
  • GunOfSod, on 06/26/2008, -1/+2yeah and when it turns to dust and blows away we can switch to farming lichen on the bedrock to make a nutritious brew for our Soylent Green livestock.
  • digitronix, on 06/26/2008, -2/+1Seems like the biofuel problem is solved every other week. Although, most these solutions sound too good to be true.
  • jamesmudgett, on 06/26/2008, -2/+1boo
  • hapax, on 06/26/2008, -2/+3Let the market take care of it. Just like the oil sands of Canada became economical to exploit once oil prices went up, fallow lands will become economical to use once the market demands their use.
  • Jenadae, on 06/26/2008, -1/+4Hemp.
  • freedomdigg, on 06/26/2008, -3/+0test in test
  • kong27, on 06/26/2008, -3/+1OMG YOU SOLVED IT!!!!!!!!!111111 ... nothing is "solved" until something is done.
  • smacksaw, on 06/26/2008, -4/+3Where are we going to get the water for this? Last time I checked, it's not like we have unlimited water. In fact, not all farmland is even near water.
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3Rain? Rivers? Most farmland is near water, did you think they truck it in?
  • allelseequal, on 06/26/2008, -2/+1Forget about it, at least if we're serious about climate change. One important reason behind the push for biofuels was that they supposedly reduced green house gas (GHG) emissions, and we have since learned that ethanol is a net loss for GHG emissions. Bringing in fallow lands under federal program like the Conservation Reserve Program would be bad on two counts:

    1. It would cause additional ethanol production, which we already know increases GHGs.

    2. It would remove an existing carbon sink, which would send even more carbon back into the atmosphere.
  • EffYoo, on 06/26/2008, -1/+3The land is fallow to regain nutrients and... doesn't the government pay farmers to keep some of their land fallow? It isn't like they're earning zero money from it...
  • Barackalypse, on 06/26/2008, -2/+4There is no "energy crisis", the problem is with high petroleum prices. Trying to grow biofuels is just going to raise demand for fertilizer, which is made from, guess what, natural gas, which has also risen about 50% in price this year. How about we stick to growing stuff to eat instead of refining it and burning it for fuel when we have much more efficient options available, like nuclear power and battery powered automobiles.
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1I'm sure it would be real easy to convince every American to buy a new car, let alone an electric which costs twice as much as their current car. I agree that we should be working towards electric cars, but keep in mind millions of cars are on the road right now that could be easily converted to run on biofuels which would remove our dependence on foreign oil and save our economy. If we legalize hemp we don't need to worry about cutting into our food supply. You can grow hemp anywhere, so we wouldn't need to take existing farmlands either. Also, most of the power in this country comes from coal power plants, nuclear plants take lots of planning and billions of dollars to implement. And we are talking about fuel for cars, not the electrical grid.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1You want to replace a car that won't run.
      ANY new car has an impact just by being created. When I get rid of my old car -- someone in the world is going to be driving it.

      Don't rush out and get a car to SAVE energy -- that's not how it works.
  • bhny, on 06/26/2008, -1/+1from the article- "you might obtain up to 8 percent of current energy needs". This is if you use every piece of abandoned farmland in the whole world. I don't think this solves the biofuel problem.
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Farming 6% of the continental U.S. acreage with biomass crops would provide all of America's energy needs.
  • bono4u, on 06/26/2008, -2/+2Right, instead of feeding us and our animals feed our cars and import more food so that more fuel can be spent on transportation. Can you see the logic?
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1If we legalized hemp that would be a non-issue. Hemp will grow anywhere so we wouldn't need to take over existing farmlands.
      • bono4u, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Don't get me wrong i would love to see hemp to be legalized ... for another reason ... but i don't see the point here with hemp.
        As far as i am convinced the best way to go is with electrical vehicles. There is no fuel which has such a good conversion then a electric engine. To power it use solar cells on the car and get good batteries. I have seen an article on digg some months ago about a batteries for electric cars which could get you 800 miles at about 120 mph.

        The fields should be there for food and clothing but not for fuel.
        • trumpydumpy, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1The point is that millions of Americans have gas burning cars and no one is going to force or convince them to buy an electric car right this second. Cars can very easily and cheaply be converted to run on either ethanol or biodiesel. I agree we should be working to switch to electric ASAP but we need something to solve the current energy crisis we face, and hemp is the solution.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1GM already bought a company that uses the discarded parts of corn. There is no real reason to need the food parts of grains for energy.
      • bono4u, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Using discarded parts of corn sounds OK, but still it is good practice to give the field a season to recover.
  • atact88, on 06/26/2008, -2/+0You know, just replacing the US military's fuel stocks with biofuel would take a land mass the size of Europe.
    • trumpydumpy, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1I don't know where you get your facts from, but I have the simple solution to that: Cut back military spending and bring our troops home. Maybe if they weren't rolling tanks and APCs down the streets of Iraq that wouldn't be a problem.
    • br0ck, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1That's only for corn. Remember that switchgrass could still be a sensible source for huge portion of our fuel needs. The US can sustainably grow 1 billion tons of switchgrass on the worst 1/6th of arable US soil. It needs much less water and fertilizer than corn and grows in places corn won't so it does not directly compete with food crops nearly as much as corn-based ethanol does. Also, switchgrass yeilds 80 percent MORE energy than required to grow and convert it, unlike the 1 to 1 ratio of corn, according to http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/ ...

      Switchgrass produces 76 gallons per ton per http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/switgrs.html so that 1 billion tons would cheaply produce 76 billion gallons of ethanol each year, which is more than half of the annual US consumption of 146 billion gallons of gasoline. Moving up to 1/3 of the arable land in the US would yield enough ethanol for all driving, but obviously that would start using up some major croplands, but remember than regular farming produces millions of tons of cellulosic waste by-products that could also be used.
  • beabis, on 06/26/2008, -2/+4The biofuel scam is just another taxpayer funded boondoggle that is making a few people rich with government handouts and soaring grain prices. Under ideal conditions the best of plants can convert about 8% of the sunlight that hits them into stored energy. In the real world it's 1% to 2%. With 15% efficient solar cells available today, and all manner of astronomical efficiencies "3 to 5 years away", we shouldn't be wasting our time with biofuels. The biofuel hoax is the result of bad science, political bribes, and a gullible public.
  • wassim2k, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Finally, I get to use the word "fallow" in a sentence.
  • VitriolAndAngst, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1The "biofuel" problem won't be solved until Chevron, Shell, BP, Exxon and the usual suspects can make sure they control it. This isn't a technology issue. They will give you alternatives as soon as choice A and B are the same mega corps.
  • ahhell, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1What energy crisis?
    What do we need biofuels for when there is no oil shortage?
  • bcamp1973, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1biofuels are not a real option. let's quit pretending they are, eh?
    • skidooer, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1We had two problems: Too much food. Not enough fuel. Biofuels was a logical step.

      The problem we've run into is that we've had several large-scale crop failures in the last couple of years at the same time the ethanol industry was ramping up production. Of course nobody talks about the crop failures, it's always the ethanol industry's fault.
  • BillE3, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1People just love to hate farmers and farming, especially when they might start to make some money. Take the land from the farmers and give it to the environmentalists, I am sure we will all have more to eat. Oh and lots of free energy too, back to the all electric homes.
    • beabis, on 06/26/2008, -0/+0Ever eat a pine tree? Many parts are edible.
  • ASSASSYN360, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1My girlfriend is pregnant. When she has the baby I plan to leave her fallow until next seed planting season.
  • andyd273, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1Um, why not plant crops to solve the FOOD shortage problem??
    Biofuels from food are one of the worst ideas ever, burning what you eat.
    I guess this could be ok, if they plant nonfood crops for biofuel and leave the food crops alone.
  • nullity, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1To all the biofuels naysayers:
    Your concerns about making biofuels from food crops are valid. It is inefficient and raises the cost of food. But you are missing a major point: biofuels do NOT need to be made from food crops.

    Say for example you have 1 acre of land and want to grow an oil crop to produce biodiesel:
    * 1 acre of sunflowers will produce about 100 gallons of oil in one year.
    * 1 acre of palm trees will produce about 800 gallons of oil.
    * 1 acre of certain strains of algae, which can be grown with no soil in hydroponic greenhouses, could produce 20000 gallons of oil! More info, and metric statistics here: http://www.oilgae.com/algae/oil/yield/yield.html

    So you think the way we are going about biofuel production is stupid? Write your congressman and tell them to stop subsidizing inefficient biofuels like corn and let the market decide what the best fuel crops are.

    Biofuels are the future. But the future is in danger of being hijacked by the powerful farm subsidies lobby, who want to take more of the taxpayers money to grow useless crops.
    • beabis, on 06/26/2008, -0/+1I agree that the farm welfare lobby is swindling the US taxpayers with their demands that farmers and biofuel developers get handouts and tax exemptions. But that algae oil website looks just like one of those free energy discussion sites. All talk and no action. A google search on the subject shows a multitude of grand projected oil yields from algae but that's all. Sounds to me like the breakthrough will eternally be 3 to 5 years away, just like solar.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.